Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107258 Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8914 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shweta Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Pandey,Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Archana Singh,C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Mr. Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Archana Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and Mr. Shashi Prakash Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.1. The writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and to quash the circular dated 19.06.2024 so far it relates to the clause 3, whereby direction has been given to relive and join again the particular school against which teachers have applied for mutual transfer. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allot the schools of the petitioner in transferred District after counseling as per the Uttar Pradesh Basic Shiksha (Teachers) Posting Rule 2008 and Government order dated 20.08.2022 & circular dated 13.09.2022 issued for the purpose of mutual transfer." Learned counsel for respondent no.2 submits that similar controversy has already been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court by orders dated 28.05.2025 and 04.07.2025 in the case of Archana Sharma Vs. State of U.P. And 3 Others and Mamta Bhartiya Vs. State of U.P. And 3 Others, passed in Writ A No.7638 of 2025 and Writ A No. 8118 of 2025 respectively. It is submitted that controversy in the present case squarely covered by the decision passed in the aforesaid cases, and present petition may also be decided on the same terms. Learned counsel for the petitioner, disputing the aforesaid, has relied upon judgement of Apex Court passed in case of Union of India & Anr. Vs. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, AIRONLINE 2013 SC 479, submitting that an authority cannot issue orders, office memorandum or executive instructions in contravention of the statutory rules. Disputing the aforesaid, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that the present case is a policy matter and that no such statutory provision has been violated, therefore, the submission and reliance placed by learned counsel for the petitioner are not applicable here. She relies on the judgement of the Apex Court passed in the case of Dr. R.K. Goyal Vs. State of U.P. and Ors. reported in (1996) 11 SCC 658, in which the Court recognized the executive's discretion in policy matters. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed that the facts of the present case are similar to that of the case of Archana Sharma (supra). According, present petition is dismissed in terms of aforementioned judgement in the case of Archana Sharma (supra). Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Rahul. Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad